One controversy subsides; another worse one begins. After the Danish cartoons, the Dutch video “Fitna” and several low-grade irritants, a short, crudely executed—and scrupulously insulting—film has inflamed deep-seated resentments. Several hundred furious demonstrators gathered in front of the American Embassy in Cairo and the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. In the confusion and violence, a U.S. Ambassador and three diplomats were killed; elsewhere embassies came under violent attack, with many wounded and serious material damage. Literalist Salafis succeeded in mobilizing a relatively small number of demonstrators; over-excited young people and ordinary citizens who, firm in their intention to protect the Prophet’s reputation, joined in to express their rejection of the American government and its policies. The demonstrations were the work of a tiny minority, but media coverage and the rapid spread of the protest movement has destabilized the region, and may well have substantial consequences for the future of the Middle East, and for the process of democratization and normalization. The violence must be condemned unconditionally. To attack innocents, diplomats and to kill indiscriminately is anti-Islamic by its very nature; Muslims cannot respond to insults to their religion in this way. On this principle there can be no compromise.
Still, there is every reason to ask what lies behind such vulgar provocations (whose intent is clearly to set off a reaction by mocking Muslims’ unanimous respect for the Prophet of Islam). Here we have individuals, or interest groups (and not the American government) that make cynical use of the noblest values–freedom of speech–to attain the most poisonous objectives, promoting hatred, racism and contempt. Well-established and protected in their rich and comfortable societies, they pretend to celebrate critical intelligence and wit at the expense of a religion practiced by much less fortunate people, many of who are struggling with numerous social frustrations and are barely surviving. But behind the celebration of freedom of speech hides the arrogance of ideologists and well-fed racists who feed off the multiform humiliation of Muslim peoples, the better to mock their “crazed” and “backward” reactions, thus to demonstrate the clear “superiority” of their civilization or the validity of their resistance to the “cancer” of retrograde Islam. In criticizing this ideological stance there can be no compromise either.
In the light of the contemporary Muslim conscience, while deploring and regretting the emotive reactions of the populations of the Muslim-majority societies of the Global South we must take into account their social and historical reality. Economically and culturally disadvantaged, their political and cultural sensitivities are sorely tried by deliberate insults to the sacred symbols that give meaning to their perseverance and their lives—the very symbols invoked by leaders or Islamist tendencies to nurture resentment and to give voice to anger. This reality in no way justifies violence, but helps us to understand its source and seek out possible solutions. It is the task of the elites, the leaders, of Muslim religious scholars and intellectuals to play a leading role in order to head off explosions of anger and mob violence. They bear three kinds of responsibility.
1. First, they must turn their attention to education, and work toward a deeper understanding of Islam, one that focuses on meaning and ultimate goals, and not simply on rituals and prohibitions. The task at hand is enormous, and requires the full participation of all schools of thought.
2. Second, Islam’s extraordinary diversity must be accepted and celebrated. Islam is one, but its interpretations are many. The existence of literalist, traditionalist, reformist, mystic, rationalist and other currents is a fact, a reality that must be treated positively and qualitatively, for each of them has its own legitimacy and should (must!) contribute a multifaceted debate among Muslims. Unfortunately, today today’s Muslim religious scholars, and the leaders of various trends, are caught up in ideological confrontation—and often a clash of egos–that create division and transform them into dangerous populists who claim for themselves the title of sole and authentic representatives of Islam. Within Sunni Islam, as within Shi’ism, between Sunnis and Shi’ites, scholars and schools of thought lash out at one another, forgetting the fundamental teachings and the principles that unite them and instead splitting along doctrinal or political lines that remain secondary at best. The consequences of these divisions are serious. Populism pushes people to vent their emotions blindly in the guise of legitimacy. The attitude—or the absence of attitude—of such scholars perpetuates among the Muslims nationalist, sectarian, and often racist postures based on their particular school of thought, their nationality or their culture. Instead of calling upon individual egos to control themselves, and upon minds to understand and celebrate diversity, leaders and scholars play, in their rhetoric or in their silence, upon people’s emotions and sense of belonging with catastrophic consequences. The Great Powers, West and East, not forgetting Israel, easily exploit these divisions and internal conflicts such as the danger-fraught fracture between Sunni and Shi’a. Instead, it is imperative that voices from the two traditions collaborate on the fundamental principles that unite all Muslims. Whenever considerations of belonging threaten to replace principles, religious scholars, intellectuals and leaders must to return to shared principles, must find common ground between these considerations, in full respect of legitimate diversity.
3. Third, scholars and intellectuals must have the courage to expose themselves further. Instead of encouraging popular feelings, or to use those feelings to further their own religious identity (Sunni, Shi’a, Salafi, reformist, Sufi, etc.) or their political ideology they must face the issue squarely, dare to be self-critical, commit themselves to dialogue and—more often than not—tell Muslims what they may not like to hear about their own failings, their lack of coherence, their propensity to play the victim, failure to understand and to accept responsibility. Far from the feverish rhetoric of the populists, they must put their credibility on the line to awaken consciences in an attempt to counter emotionalism and mass blindness. The educated elites, students, intellectuals and professionals also have a major responsibility. The way they follow their leaders, as does their status as intermediaries makes their active and critical presence imperative: holding the scholars and the leaders accountable, simplifying and participating in grassroots dynamics is an absolute imperative. The passivity of the educated elites, looking down upon inflamed and uncontrolled populations far below them, is a grievous fault.
Ultimately we end up with the leaders—and the peoples—we deserve. Without committed and determined religious scholars, intellectuals and business people aware of the critical nature of the issues, there can be little doubt that we will be heading for an upsurge of religious populism among the leadership, and the emotional blindness of the masses. The words and the commitment of the leaders must set the highest standards: beginning with knowledge, understanding, coherence and self-criticism. They must abandon the notion of victimization by appealing to responsibility, by freeing themselves from the illusion that opposition to the “other” can lead to reconciliation with one’s self. Make no mistake: the violent reactions to the insults uttered against the Prophet have driven many Muslims to behaviors far removed from the principles of Islam. We become ourselves not in opposition to someone else, but in accord and at peace with our conscience, our principles and our aspirations. In the serene mastery of ourselves, and not in the aggressive rejection of the Other. Such is the message the world’s Muslims need to hear, and most of all, put into practice.
Source: http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/an-appeal-to-contemporary-muslim-conscience-1.1077670
Mashallah! If only our scholars were to take the step forward and express the need for dialogue and understanding the way you do, the Islamic world wouldn’t be here today. Unluckily, only the most extreme of them take that step today, and for the worse of the community. God wills, more people like you will emerge from the ranks of islamic scholars in the future, the elites will face their duties to their countries and peoples and work to change things, and the masses will be confronted to interpretations of Islam that can help us progress instead of throwing the blame on others.
Once again Tariq Ramadan courageously says what every Islamic scholar must say and act upon in their own sphere of influence; his words are beautifully eloquent and so very much needed.
“”…tell Muslims what they may not like to hear about their own failings, their lack of coherence, their propensity to play the victim, failure to understand and to accept responsibility.”
…so they can end up like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who does exactly that, and ended up being labeled as guess what? an “islamophobe®”
JazakAllah brother..its really nice. we hv to focus on strengthening ourselves.
“They must abandon the notion of victimization…” Excellent point! Unfortunately the writer contradicts himself and displays a victim mentality by claiming that those who celebrate freedom of speech and the freedom to offend are out to promote hatred and ‘humiliate’ the muslims who in his words are ‘less fortunate”.. First, however unpleasant and despicable the movie is – it does not promote hatred or racism – it is simply satire in very very bad taste… Second, freedom of speech is the freedom to offend and say things that are generally unacceptable – there is no point in the first amendment if freedom of speech entailed only the freedom to express views that are acceptable.. Third, freedom of speech has been used over the years to criticize religious concepts / leaders and offend people of almost every faith – repeatedly.. It is just that criticizing / satirizing Islam is a relatively recent phenomenon simply because Islam and muslims are relative newcomers in the west. Islam is or has never been singled out as the faith of choice to be satirized.. It doesn’t make sense that Islam/muslim should be shielded from criticism and satire because they are ‘less fortunate”.. Now the oil- rich Arabs don’t come across as “less fortunate” to me but still it wouldn’t make sense to make an argument that satirizing Jesus is an attack on the “less fortunate” simply because many Christians in Africa live in abject poverty..
I wish Tariq Ramadan took his own advice as an ‘educated elite’ and did some ‘self – criticism’ as a muslim and called for reform of the anti-blasphemy laws in sharia which no doubt fed the ’emotional blindness of the masses’ to some extent at least. It is depressing that an educated Muslim like Ramadan cannot rise above this persecution complex and uses the “less fortunate” victim card just like everyone else – only difference is that he uses sophisticated language to convey his point..